Of course, this distinction depends, finally, on the definition of mind which we are prepared to accept. Dennes gives an adequate summary and criticism of Durkheim, for instance, who considered collective mind to consist of the collective ideas or representations of a society; and of Wundt, who considered mind an integration of processes, not of ideas, and therefore sought for the group mind in the collective results of group mental process, in speech, religion and custom. But Dennes himself seems confused by the need of defining mind without regard to bodily structure. He says: [22]“Individual minds or persons have or produce bodies as well as objective mental products. But social groups are not minds and have no bodies. They are associations of minds.” MacDougall defines mind as [23]“An organized system of mental or purposive forces,” and continues, “In the sense so defined, every highly organized human society may be properly said to possess a group mind.” While MacDougall’s definition seems circular in nature, it still recognizes that a functional definition of mind can make no distinction of structure, whether any particular mind is associated with one or many bodies. Lindeman calls mind [24]“the total equipment with which man responds to his environment”, which seems more than one can accept, for “total equipment” would include hands and feet, as well as mind. A more precise statement of the same general tenor appears in Dr. Singer’s Mind as Behavior: [25]Consciousness is not something inferred from behavior; it _is_ behavior. Or, more accurately, our belief in consciousness is an expectation of probable behavior based on an observation of actual behavior, a belief to be confirmed or refuted by more observation, as any other belief in a fact is to be tried out. Thus, any functional definition of mind that has no reference to brain or nervous system, must apply and does apply in the group of persons in exactly the same sense as to the single individual. If there is “unified behavior,” if there is “organized system of purposes,” if there is “response to environment,” then we have mind, whether the behavior, response, or purpose dwell in one or two or many bodies.